Spring has sprung?

Guest Blog 
 
I can’t believe that another winter is over, only last Friday I was downhill skiing on Cairngorm Mountain enjoying almost perfect conditions. Perfect if you can ignore the 96 mph wind that closed the train at lunchtime! Any yet today when I look out towards the willow nursery patch, I can see the snow drops fading and the willow catkins beginning to come out, the first sign that they have survived the winter and are eagerly anticipating the warmth to come. It’ll soon be time to pack away the winter gear and begin to plan this summer’s mountain woodland survey programme, soon be time to organise the volunteers and head out into the hills identifying and recording the remnants of what is a very special habitat. Even though they are few and far between, we along with our partners, are planning a comeback for mountain woodlands and like the willows the plans are beginning to come alive. So watch this space to see how our plans grow!?

William Bodles

Watch out: there’s a new paradigm about!

When I was last a student it seemed almost compulsory to weave a “paradigm shift” into every piece of work – indeed it was surprising that universities did not have paradigm spotters clubs. To a great extent this was because sustainable development was beginning to emerge as a mainstream concept, and was having an impact on old ways of thinking. In the ensuing decades we have all become familiar, and to varying extents, comfortable with this as a context for economic and social development.

However the “development” part of sustainable development firmly roots it in concepts like “economic growth and development” and “wealth creation”. Philosophically I have always been uneasy about these notions, particularly wealth creation which infers a god-like capacity to make something out of nothing. Their predication on increased consumption, coupled with rising populations, calls the long term sustainability of sustainable development into question.

The new paradigm on the block is “degrowth”. It was first aired by the Club of Rome in “Limits to Growth”, and was subsequently developed by French academics. The arguments for economic degrowth are twofold: the limits to the carrying capacity of the ecosystem; and, the social reality that increased prosperity does not bring increased wellbeing. The social argument for degrowth is very similar to the theories of Buddhist Economics first popularised in the West by Schumacher, also in the 1960’s.

These arguments are steadily gaining credence, so much so that the second European Degrowth Conference was held in Barcelona recently. Given that painful economic adjustments seem inevitable over the coming decade the time may well be right to begin implementing something akin to zero growth/degrowth strategies.

What will this mean for forestry? Primarily it will mean returning to operating within the natural carrying capacity of the ecosystem. This will mean a departure from “productive” commercial conifer plantations on many sites, and an increase in the timber grown and harvested from native and mixed woodlands on sites more appropriate for their establishment and management. It will also mean an increase in the ecosystem services forestry provides, which will contribute to the improved wellbeing of all of us.

That said, there is no denying that it will mean a decrease in the volume of wood based consumer goods, which will be mirrored by similar decreases in production in many other sectors. This may not necessarily be a bad thing, particularly if it is mirrored by waste reduction and a collective re-assessment of wants and needs.  Indeed, if the transition is managed carefully, may indeed result in improvements in levels of well being.

However old habits related to the pursuit of wealth will not be changed easily and must be given an outlet.

Instead of basing wealth creation largely on exploitation of natural resources, in the future we will need to base it more on exploitation of the virtual real estate and intellectual property rights of an ever expanding and increasingly versatile world wide web. Indeed this may be one of the twin pillars of future sustainability, rather than sustainable “development”. The other will be far more careful management of natural resources, ensuring that we maximise their capacity to support economic activity without damaging the underlying ecology or its capacity to deliver the ecosystem services which will be all important to future wellbeing. The latter is something that the forestry sector can begin to address now.

Pinko perverts in the pay of Peking

Housing is on my mind for a couple of reasons: during August HB maintained a presence at the Highland Housing Expo; and, to the utter amazement of anyone who knows Sandie and me, we have just moved into the house which we have been building for nigh on a decade.

Although some opportunities were missed, and as one architect said to me; “it will be really good when it is finished”, the Expo was an undoubted success with an impressive range of building styles, methods and materials in a well laid out site. Visitor numbers exceeded expectations and most organisations with advisory or promotional stands ran out of leaflets. Visitors proved to be very receptive to information on renewable energy and other sustainability issues; at Highland Birchwoods we were reprinting wood fuel advice material on a daily basis to keep up with demand.

As to moving house, it is invariably an interesting process insofar as it presents an opportunity to rediscover all those little bits and pieces that had gradually disappeared from view over time. I rediscovered all sorts of things – samples of cork from Spain, early samples from Finland of the Thermowood process applied to broadleaves; and, an endless collection of press cuttings and leaflets which, at the time, must have seemed worthy of retention even if their value is less apparent now.

One old Guardian caught my eye. Sandie was using to wrap ornaments, and had exposed a headline which ran something like “Senator claims cycle schemes are plot to take over US cities”. Being part of the generation that grew up with the infamous, and possibly apocryphal, 1960’s Senatorial description of American students as “pinko perverts in the pay of Peking” the urge to read on was irresistible.

It seems that the senator in question was referring to several US cities that were now adopting cycle schemes that made bikes available for hire and drop off at sites throughout them. Apparently the senator was concerned that these schemes were being “foisted” on the city authorities by a UN related organisation in a way that was indicative of an intention to take control of the cities themselves.

I read more as I was curious to find out the identity of this mysterious organisation as I felt like sending them a copy of the article together with a note of congratulation. It turns out that it was ICLEI, which is also a partner in one of HB’s projects!! Gratified that we are still choosing our partners wisely I didn’t bother scanning the article as I knew I would be seeing ICLEI later this month.

ICLEI work very closely with local authorities; indeed they are a membership organisation, the members being local governments throughout the world with an interest in sustainaility. Hardly a recipe for a takeover conspiracy is it? However it does go to show how easily the most laudable actions and the best of intentions can become misrepresented in the media.

The new “wikimedia” have immense positive potential, but by their very nature they make negative impacts inevitable unless all of us who are metaphorically speaking “in the pay of Peking” take great care to pro-actively explain what we do and why in very clear and transparent terms that leave no room for subsequent misinterpretation.

Market Forces

The assertion that “the market will decide” issues of supply, demand and pricing is widely accepted but the blunt truth is that free markets rarely exist, and the “decisions” they make often result in market failure, usually with undesirable consequences for society in general and the disadvantaged in particular. When these markets are being supported with public finance these consequences are also often extremely expensive.

Farming is a good illustration of this issue. Extreme weather has had a drastic impact on global wheat production with shortages and dramatic price rises anticipated. Unfortunately the UK has not been affected significantly by these weather patterns and thanks to decades of public subsidy it is approximately 130% self sufficient in wheat.  

Why “unfortunately”? Because, despite the public financial support they receive, our farmers will sell their crop on the international market to the highest available bidder resulting in either shortages or price increases for their loyal, subsidy providing domestic customer base.

Surely there needs to be a better reconciliation between public support and public benefit?

Sadly timber markets have similar issues. For decades our timber processing industry has been based on a secure state sector timber supply. Owing to the financial incentives provided for woodland establishment and management the private sector is now rapidly displacing the state sector despite being both unable and unwilling to say how much timber it has, or when it will bring it to market. Uncertainty over timber availability discourages long term investment in skills and machinery and undermines Scottish Government policies on renewable heat, carbon and sustainable construction.

Uncertainties over raw material supply seem to be a major constraint on wood fuel market expansion. FCS is increasingly concerned that its timber is all committed and I am told that the private sector are delaying felling until the Renewable Heat Incentive is in place as the wood fuel sector will then be able to pay a higher price. Meanwhile government policy is stalling and important economic development in rural areas has been postponed because a publically subsidised timber supply is unavailable.

We could ensure a better understanding of the timber supply and give better guarantees of its availability simply by extending the life of a forestry grant for the lifetime of the crop, and include felling periods which must be adhered to, and only amended by prior agreement. However, one of the reasons why the private sector holds out for a price improvement is because it has often had the rough end of the stick in terms of the distribution of added value throughout the supply chain and this issue must also be addressed at the same time.

In the future real raw material shortages will pose real challenges. The last thing we need is to create artificial shortages through a combination of inappropriate market structures and public support systems. If you have an interest in stimulating debate on alternative market mechanisms to promote a more equitable added value distribution and a closer alignment of public support and public benefit we would love to hear from you.

Schrodinger’s wood fuel

We were discussing wood fuel supply in the office last week when someone pointed out the similarity with the paradox of Schrodinger’s Cat. Schrodinger developed this to challenge the Copenhagen interpretation of Quantum Mechanics which states that any system or object exists in a combination of all possible states and only enters a definable state at the moment when it is measured.

In the theoretical experiment a cat is put in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter, there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small that perhaps in the course of the hour, one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none. If an atom does decay, the Geiger counter tube discharges, and through a relay releases a hammer that shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid which kills the cat. If no atom decays before the chamber is opened the cat will be alive.

Schrodinger’s point was that according to Quantum theory, the cat is both alive and dead until the chamber is opened. The problem he was trying to address is in many ways very similar to the problem facing all concerned with identifying the available wood fuel supply. If the cat represents standing timber then it is clear that the timber can exist in all states (ie be theoretically available to all timber markets) until the market (the radioactive material) indicates that it wants it in one particular form (wood fuel) or another (traditional timber markets) and jolts the landowner (the hydrocyanic acid) into making a decision, at which point the availability or otherwise of wood fuel is known for the first time.

In practice the difficulties facing the wood fuel supplier include a further layer of uncertainty as the jolt (ie the economic incentive) to the landowner may not be sufficient to bring the timber to market at all.

These uncertainties are a poor foundation both for timber processing industries with long investment payback periods, and for a secure energy supply. At one time nationalised industries were seen as a mechanism for coping with the vagaries of the market but more recently a free market has been seen as more efficient. In the forestry sector this has resulted in a switch from reliance on state sector timber and long term supply guarantees to reliance on private sector timber with availability subject to market conditions.

Unfortunately forestry does not operate in a free market, and while related land uses such as agriculture are subsidised it never will.The long term sustainability of the sector will require a re-examination of the incentives and regulations affecting the industry to ensure that they encourage desirable market behaviour. There are two or three levers that might be used to good effect concerning availability of timber in general and wood fuel in particular:

• A requirement for a forest management plan with predicted harvesting dates to accompany all grant applications;
• A copy of harvester data logs to be sent to FCS as part of Felling License requirements, facilitating creation of a stem data base, allowing use of cost effective predictive models for production forecasting; and,
• Establishment of “sustainability” limits on timber transport to both make timber movements easier to predict and map, and to ensure the primacy of local rather than wider markets.

Do two straight lines make a curve?

Sandie and I have been building a timber home for an extremely long time! We are now doing the second fix woodwork; a task which requires a high standard of workmanship and material. Sadly, although my joinery skills are limited this problem is exacerbated by the quality of the timber.

While completing the timber frame, internal studwork and cladding we had become resigned to sawn timber being twisted, dimensionally inconsistent and soaking wet. After we had received a load of treated planking which was so badly infected with a black furry fungus that we could smell it from several feet away we really thought we had seen the timber trade at its worst.

We naively thought that prepared finishing timber, architrave and other mouldings would be of a better quality that reflected both their higher price and their purpose: but no! More than once prepared timber has been delivered in the rain, in uncovered vehicles and left lying on the ground because the delivery was not on the agreed date so no one was there to receive it. The proportion of cupped, twisted bowed and split timber is alarmingly high and the incidence of compression wood is often so high that the surface finish looks as if it has been gnawed by a rat rather than machined.

These are not minor aggravations. For instance, it is impossible to cut a straight mitre in a piece of cupped timber. The more a piece of wood is cupped, the more curved an angled cut through it will be. The defective finish that results is a very visible and extremely negative message about the benefits of wood as a building material.

We tried to overcome these problems by going to collect our timber and visually checking every piece before loading it. Not only is this very time consuming, but it is often impossible to find what you want without either compromising on quality, or holding up progress until the yard takes another delivery.
I remember reading some years ago in Timber Trade Journal that Scandinavian exporters were amazed at the UK’s seemingly inexhaustible appetite for unkilned timber. Almost all the wood in Scottish builder’s merchants is imported, and the sad truth is that we have a reputation for accepting rubbish. This is not the fault of the people staffing our yards, all of whom in my experience do their best to be helpful. The problem is that they do not understand wood, and the key decision makers in the supply chain do not care about it, and make no effort to either train staff or educate customers in the basics of timber quality and fitness for purpose, or timber storage and handling practice.

The result is stacks of kilned and dimensioned timber left in the rain, often inadequately stickered so that if it was not bowed when it left the mill it will be when it leaves the yard and racks of planed wood that are clearly unfit for purpose.

The forestry sector is rightly concerned with timber quality, but there is little point in growing good quality timber until our retail supply chain takes the timber quality issue on board. It is time to work with it to address this issue.

And the answer to my original question is that in the joinery context two straight lines do not make a curve, but one, in conjunction with an allegedly flat piece of wood, will.

Going Dutch

I was in Amsterdam for a few days last week and apart from thoroughly enjoying the art and the peaceful ambience of the canals I also came away with an intense admiration for dutch aboriculture and management of urban, roadside and hedgerow trees. Ancient pollards are impeccably maintained as high trees using carefully considered pruning regimes and discrete webs of steel cables. Younger trees are pruned into a variety of spherical or pencil shaped additions to the urban landscape.
In one of the squares I passed through trees approximately 12 feet high that had been pruned to have flat tops reminiscent of how I imagine that the ancient “dancing oaks” of druidic England must have been. The results were visually extremely effective, ensuring that the trees gave a high degree of shelter while casting minimal shadow.
The Dutch government is currently locked into an industrial dispute over wages for the scaffy, and there were substantial mounds of rubbish at most street corners which were slowly subsiding into the canals. Given such apparent financial constraints it is surprising that expenditure on arboriculture is maintained. To a great extent the reason is that in many parts of the country hedgerow trees are regarded as an important asset both in terms of shelter and in terms of production of wood, primarily for wood fuel.
In Scotland there is a great deal of discussion about land availability for woodland expansion. Given that one of the drivers of for this is increasing wood fuel demand it might be worth considering the potential role of hedgerow trees. Trees in hedgerows will sequester as much carbon, if not more given probable site fertility, than their woodland counterparts, and given the probable mixture of species, may have a greater biodiversity value. Moreover, they will burn!
The more hedgerow and amenity trees we plant the less pressure there will be to establish woodlands on organic soils or on productive farmland in direct conflict with food production.
This is not as fanciful as it sounds. A colleague in the northern Netherlands has established wood fuel supply chains based on the 7000 kilometres of hedgerows and wooded banks in the region. He has found that if the trees are pollarded on a 15-20 year cycle it takes approximately 9-16 metres of wooded hedgerow to produce a cubic metre of wood chip. On that basis if a 10 ha field was bounded by hedgerow it would produce 80-140 m3 of wood chip or 4-7 m3/yr.